Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Humza Yousaf - how bad will it be?

78 replies

JohnnyMcGrathSaysFuckOff · 27/03/2023 14:30

Just seen HY promising to deliver for all, yadda yadda. How much of a disaster is this for women's rights? Will he be able to reignite the GRR or has the moment passed?

OP posts:
Abccde · 27/03/2023 17:30

I don't think its great for Scotland but I don't necessarily think it's bad for women's rights 😉

He won't win in court and its more publicity for women's rights and the clash with men's rights.

I think he will be similar to Truss. Both in competence and tenure.

There is still a lot of rot to come out. I reckon that will start very soon.

MajorCarolDanvers · 27/03/2023 17:31

Hopefully bad enough to break the cult voting for the SNP

XDownwiththissortofthingX · 27/03/2023 17:31

MissLucyEyelesbarrow · 27/03/2023 17:25

This is plainly nonsense, because if GRR Bill is outwith competence because of interactivity with EA, then current GRA is also incompatible with EA, yet here we are in a situation where the two coexist

That doesn't follow, though, because there is nothing to stop the UK Government passing a statute that may have an impact on the operation of another statute, whereas there is an explicit provision to allow it to block this happening in Scotland - presumably on the grounds that, if the UK Government passes an act that affects another negatively, it is its own mess to sort out, whereas, if a devolved government does so, the UK government can be left with the problem without the power to correct it.

Yes, this I have no argument with, however, it seems that there are solutions to the deadlock that do not require the sledgehammer of the S35, which is why I'm of the opinion that motivation for the use of the S35 stems purely from a difference in ideological outlook rather than any genuine concern about legislative over-reach.

I suppose we'll find out in the fullness of time, because when, if as expected, the Supreme Court sides with the UK government, then there is going to have to be some practical discussion about what exactly the SG can do to resolve the UKG's objections, because right now all that the S35 supporting documentation contains is some vague hypotheticals relating to employment law, IT systems and so on.

Laladybird · 27/03/2023 17:38

MajorCarolDanvers · 27/03/2023 17:31

Hopefully bad enough to break the cult voting for the SNP

Surely good news for Alba.

Has Ash Denham said anything yet?

Laladybird · 27/03/2023 17:40

@XDownwiththissortofthingX can quibble the legal minutiae on s35 but many people are relieved that this intolerant piece of legislation is on hold.

DrMarciaFieldstone · 27/03/2023 17:44

I think he will be similar to Truss. Both in competence and tenure.

Absolutely agree. Both ‘continuity candidates’ pushed by the exiting leader trying to maintain control. Both absolutely useless and Humza will be found out as quickly as her.

The fact all of the opposition parties are happy he won, says it all. The SNP juggernaut days are over.

MissLucyEyelesbarrow · 27/03/2023 17:46

XDownwiththissortofthingX · 27/03/2023 17:31

Yes, this I have no argument with, however, it seems that there are solutions to the deadlock that do not require the sledgehammer of the S35, which is why I'm of the opinion that motivation for the use of the S35 stems purely from a difference in ideological outlook rather than any genuine concern about legislative over-reach.

I suppose we'll find out in the fullness of time, because when, if as expected, the Supreme Court sides with the UK government, then there is going to have to be some practical discussion about what exactly the SG can do to resolve the UKG's objections, because right now all that the S35 supporting documentation contains is some vague hypotheticals relating to employment law, IT systems and so on.

Show quote history

I think you're right that it was partly ideological, but I don't think you can divorce politics and ideology. You could equally argue that it was ideological to pass a bill that so clearly did not have majority public support for a number of its provisions.

Indiana2021 · 27/03/2023 17:52

I think it'll all unravel fairly quickly so don't think he'll be there for long.
Too many rebels rebelling now and the united front they presented was always their strength.
I'm getting some popcorn in!

Longtimeloiterer · 27/03/2023 17:54

I've rarely seen a politician who's delivered what has been promised.

Expecting anything different from Yousef is naive.

Baldieheid · 27/03/2023 18:05

XDownwiththissortofthingX · 27/03/2023 16:52

Unless I'm missing something, the UNCRC is not a Scottish Government Bill, so is in no way comparable.

The GRR Bill is not out with competency. Holyrood made sure of that by rejecting poison pill amendments lodged in bad faith and for no other purpose than to try and drag it outwith competence. The S35 is clearly in play for no other reason than it's a Bill that conflicts with Tory position on trans rights, which is made abundantly clear by the flimsiness and downright absurdity of some of the 'justifications' put forward in the S35 documentation.

Show quote history

Poison pills?

Like what?

Stopping male rapists self id-ing as women to obtain access to women's jail?

Stopping known sex offenders self id-ing?

Or do you mean something else?

ArabellaScott · 27/03/2023 19:41

XDownwiththissortofthingX · 27/03/2023 16:52

Unless I'm missing something, the UNCRC is not a Scottish Government Bill, so is in no way comparable.

The GRR Bill is not out with competency. Holyrood made sure of that by rejecting poison pill amendments lodged in bad faith and for no other purpose than to try and drag it outwith competence. The S35 is clearly in play for no other reason than it's a Bill that conflicts with Tory position on trans rights, which is made abundantly clear by the flimsiness and downright absurdity of some of the 'justifications' put forward in the S35 documentation.

Show quote history

It is a Scottish Govt Bill. 'UNCRC (Incorporation) (Scotland) Bill'

https://www.gov.scot/publications/implementing-united-nations-convention-rights-child-introductory-guidance/pages/5/

United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child implementation: introductory guidance

This Scottish Government non-statutory guidance has been developed in partnership with public authorities and the third sector, and introduces key concepts within the UNCRC and links with further resources for embedding a children’s rights-based approa...

https://www.gov.scot/publications/implementing-united-nations-convention-rights-child-introductory-guidance/pages/5

AnythingToSay · 27/03/2023 19:50

Bad for women's rights.
Bad for Scotland.
Disastrous for SNP.
Good for unionists.
Good for Alba.

SammyScrounge · 27/03/2023 20:48

MissLucyEyelesbarrow · 27/03/2023 14:43

Based on his record of delivery to date, the union - and women's rights - have never been safer 😉

He really is useless, that useless, isn't he?😂

ChocSaltyBalls · 27/03/2023 20:52

XDownwiththissortofthingX · 27/03/2023 17:18

This is plainly nonsense, because if GRR Bill is outwith competence because of interactivity with EA, then current GRA is also incompatible with EA, yet here we are in a situation where the two coexist.

People in Scotland can still acquire a GRC as things are, so if you are contending that making that process simpler conflicts with EA then you must also be of the belief that current GRA conflicts with EA. This is a completely different argument altogether, and if that is your contention, then you must ask yourself why Westminster is seemingly content that current GRA legislation is not in conflict with EA, yet contends that simplifying the process would lead to a conflict. It's irreconcilable to hold both positions at the same time.

Show quote history

It’s not

the GRR bill being passed in Scotland would have meant the legal definition of men and women could be different in Scotland and rUK following the Haldane judgment

BigBoysDontCry · 27/03/2023 21:08

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

nauticant · 27/03/2023 21:24

Poison pills?

Like what?

Stopping male rapists self id-ing as women to obtain access to women's jail?

I believe the argument is that having a blanket prohibition in relation to a particular class of prisoner, such as a male sex offender, can be an infringement of the human rights of members of that class while having a process that has an assesment process in which their individual and particular circumstances are weighed up, would not.

2013isback · 27/03/2023 21:26

This is plainly nonsense, because if GRR Bill is outwith competence because of interactivity with EA, then current GRA is also incompatible with EA, yet here we are in a situation where the two coexist.

Nope. The current GRA legislation is identical (although policies around, for example, applying for and issuing certificates differ) across the UK because Holyrood and Stormont accepted the 2004 UK legislation "as is" via Legislative Consent Motions (a Sewel Motion, in Scotland's case). The competency is devolved, so the legislation CAN vary, but historically it has not.

Jack McConnell explains the specific conflict caused by the passage of the GRR (not the concept of devolved legislation in this area, but the reality of this devolved legislation) here: https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/snp-trans-reforms-risk-attracting-sex-offenders-to-scotland-says-jack-mcconnell-7wwsl3739 .

Mum2jenny · 27/03/2023 21:28

previously I’d vote SNP, but not now

nauticant · 27/03/2023 21:30

More blanket ban-human rights reasoning:

https://www.solicitorsjournal.com/sjarticle/human-rights-of-sex-offenders-breached-by-blanket-ban

Speculative and not settled law by any means.

BlackForestCake · 27/03/2023 21:39

The really bad news is that Humza winning means the insane Greens will still be in the government.

Baldieheid · 27/03/2023 21:39

I don't see a good reason why prisoners should be stopped from voting. But I certainly see why sex offenders should be stopped from adopting or working with kids. You can't stop them fathering their own though, so I suppose they'd say "why this but not that?"
I also see why no males, at all, should be incarcerated with females. Special males go in a special male unit if the main jail is unsuitable for them. Or aren't women and kids human too?

Baldieheid · 27/03/2023 21:41

This reply has been deleted

Message deleted by MNHQ. Here's a link to our Talk Guidelines.

mumda · 27/03/2023 21:50

Is he the one who fell off a scooter?